MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074156599 · doi:10.1142/9789812776136_0058

EPILOC: A (WORKING) TEXT-BASED SYSTEM FOR PREDICTING PROTEIN SUBCELLULAR LOCATION

2007· article· en· W2074156599 on OpenAlexaff
Scott T. Brady, Hagit Shatkay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Predicting the subcellular location of proteins is an active research area, as a protein's location within the cell provides meaningful cues about its function. Several previous experiments in utilizing text for protein subcellular location prediction varied in methods, applicability and performance level. In an earlier work we have used a preliminary text classification system and focused on the integration of text features into a sequence-based classifier to improve location prediction performance. RESULTS: Here the focus shifts to the text-based component itself. We introduce EpiLoc, a comprehensive text-based localization system. We provide an in-depth study of text-feature selection, and study several new ways to associate text with proteins, so that text-based location prediction can be performed for practically any protein. We show that EpiLoc's performance is comparable to (and may even exceed) that of state-of-the-art sequence-based systems. EpiLoc is available at: http://epiloc.cs.queensu.ca.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.011

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations74
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207